If you’re using peptides like CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin, you’ve likely come across concerns about the potential risks of developing cancer with their long-term use.
But do these peptides cause cancer?
Or is this fear based on fearmongering and a failure to understand what the science ACTUALLY says?
In this article, we’ll explore the latest evidence to discover if CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin are truly linked to cancer or tumor growth of any kind.
What are Ipamorelin and CJC-1295?
Ipamorelin is a growth hormone-releasing peptide (GHRP) that mimics ghrelin and binds to the ghrelin receptor in the brain, stimulating the release of growth hormone (GH) from the pituitary gland.
This results in increased plasma GH levels, which affects many biological processes that include the promotion of lipolysis and protein synthesis.
For these reasons alone, Ipamorelin is popular among athletes and fitness enthusiasts seeking a boost in muscle mass and strength.
Additionally, it also promotes fat loss due to accelerating metabolism and fat breakdown, leading to a more sculpted physique.
Because Ipamorelin does not affect the release of other endogenous hormones such as acetylcholine, aldosterone, cortisol, and prolactin, it has virtually no negative side effects.
Therefore, it is considered to be one of the safest GHRPs.
CJC-1295, like Ipamorelin, is a synthetic peptide that binds to specific receptors on the pituitary gland and stimulates the release of GH.
It is a long-acting growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) that can sustain GH secretion over extended periods of time.
Thus, CJC-1295 use can result in ongoing fat loss and muscle growth.
When used together, both peptides become one of the most effective stacks for the following health outcomes:
- Promoting muscle growth
- Speeding up fat loss
- Improving lipid profiles
- Enhancing deep sleep
- Accelerating body repair and recovery.
This combination is known as the Ipamorelin and CJC-1295 stack.
Despite these clear benefits, there is increasing concern among biohackers regarding the potential link between the use of either peptide and an increased risk of cancer.
Can CJC 1295 and Ipamorelin Peptides Cause Cancer?
The Cancer Controversy
There are a lot of falsehoods being promoted about CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin causing cancer and tumor growth, especially in men over 50.
This controversy stems from a study that links IGF-1, a natural byproduct of increased growth hormone production, to cancer development.
The study in question was published in Frontiers and involved an analysis of 4,790 cases from 17 studies across 12 countries.
In summation, women with higher IGF-1 levels had a 30% increased risk of breast cancer.
Anybody who has used either CJC-1295 and/or Ipamorelin KNOW they help increase IGF-1 levels indirectly by stimulating the release of growth hormone.
Based on this mechanism of action alone, it is automatically assumed that these peptides contribute to tumor growth (or are at least correlated with this outcome).
However, most clinical studies to date have not found a proven connection between either of these peptides and an increased risk of cancer.
What the Scientific Evidence Says
In fact, a growing number of studies show that both peptides are safe and well-tolerated in healthy adults.
In a study published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, researchers discovered that the use of CJC-1295 can boost GH and IGF-I levels for up to 28 days without any serious side effects:
“Therapeutic use of GHRH to enhance GH secretion is limited by its short duration of action.
The objective of this study was to examine the pharmacokinetic profile, pharmacodynamic effects, and safety of CJC-1295, a long-acting GHRH analog.
The study design was two randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, ascending dose trials with durations of 28 and 49 days.
The study was performed at two investigational sites.
Healthy subjects, ages 21-61 years, were studied.
CJC-1295 or the placebo was administered subcutaneously in one of four ascending single doses in the first study and in two or three weekly or biweekly doses in the second study.
The main outcome measures were peak concentrations and area under the curve of GH and IGF-I; standard pharmacokinetic parameters were used for CJC-1295.
After a single injection of CJC-1295, there were dose-dependent increases in mean plasma GH concentrations by 2- to 10 times for 6 days or more and in mean plasma IGF-I concentrations by 1.5- to 3 times for 9-11 days.
The estimated half-life of CJC-1295 was 5.8-8.1 days.
After multiple CJC-1295 doses, mean IGF-I levels remained above the baseline for up to 28 days.
No serious adverse reactions were reported.
Subcutaneous administration of CJC-1295 resulted in sustained, dose-dependent increases in GH and IGF-I levels in healthy adults and was safe and relatively well tolerated, particularly at doses of 30 or 60 microg/kg.
There was evidence of a cumulative effect after multiple doses.
This data supports the potential utility of CJC-1295 as a therapeutic agent.”
And the same goes for Ipamorelin.
In a study published in Supportive Care in Cancer, researchers explored the effects of anamorelin, a GHRP similar to ipamorelin that promotes growth hormone release and raises IGF-1 levels.
The study — conducted on a mouse model of non-small cell lung cancer — found that while anamorelin effectively increased growth hormone levels and showed a trend toward higher IGF-1, it did not promote tumor growth:
“Anamorelin (ONO-7643) is an orally active ghrelin receptor agonist in development for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)-related anorexia/cachexia.
It displays both orexigenic and anabolic properties via ghrelin mimetic activity and transient increases in growth hormone (GH).
However, increasing GH and insulin-like growth factor-1 in cancer patients raises concerns of potentially stimulating tumor growth.
Therefore, we investigated the effect of ghrelin and anamorelin on tumor growth in a murine NSCLC xenograft model.
Female nude mice (15-21/group) with established A549 tumors were administered ghrelin (2 mg/kg i.p.), anamorelin (3, 10, or 30 mg/kg p.o.), or vehicle controls daily for 28 days.
Tumor growth, food consumption, and body weight were monitored.
Murine growth hormone (mGH) and murine insulin-like growth factor-1 (mIGF-1) were measured in plasma.
Tumor growth progressed throughout the study, with no significant differences between treatment groups.
Daily food consumption was also relatively unchanged, while the percentage of mean body weight gain at the end of treatment was significantly increased in animals administered 10 and 30 mg/kg compared with controls (p < 0.01).
Peak mGH levels were significantly higher in ghrelin- and anamorelin-treated animals than in controls, while peak mIGF-1 levels were slightly elevated but not statistically significant. All regimens were well tolerated.
These findings demonstrate that neither anamorelin nor ghrelin promoted tumor growth in this model, despite increased levels of mGH and a trend of increased mIGF-1.
Together with anamorelin’s ability to increase body weight, these results support the clinical development of ghrelin receptor agonist treatments for managing NSCLC-related anorexia/cachexia.”
STILL worried about peptides causing cancer?
Whenever you see any claim about a peptide being linked to a higher risk of cancer, ask yourself if what you’re reading is a theoretical risk or a proven outcome.
Theoretical risks are potential dangers suggested by biological/cellular mechanisms of action or early preclinical data but are NOT yet confirmed.
At this stage we are still on speculation, meaning you could simultaneously be right or wrong.
Proven outcomes, on the other hand, are based on years of solid research and human clinical trials.
Right now, all the available studies show no direct or causal link between peptides like CJC-1295/Ipamorelin and cancer.
All of the theoretical concerns are not currently supported by the existing evidence available to us.
Debunking Myths
It’s not enough for you to be told it’s a myth that CJC-1295 and/or Ipamorelin can trigger cancer, or at the very least promote tumor growth.
Let’s thoroughly debunk these misconceptions with scientific research to show you why it’s not worth your time to be in FEAR of this dis-EASE!
Myth 1: CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin Cause Cancer
As mentioned earlier, there is no solid evidence establishing a causal link between CJC-1295/Ipamorelin use and cancer.
These peptides are designed to mimic natural processes in the body, and studies consistently show that both of them safe and well-tolerated.
For instance, a study in the International Journal of Colorectal Disease showed that patients recovering from bowel surgery tolerated Ipamorelin well when given the peptide twice daily for 7 days:
“117 patients were enrolled, of whom 114 patients composed the safety and modified intent-to-treat populations.
Demographic and disease characteristics were balanced between groups.
Overall incidence of any treatment-emergent adverse events was 87.5% in the ipamorelin group and 94.8% in the placebo group.
The median time to first tolerated meal was 25.3 and 32.6 hours in the ipamorelin and placebo groups, respectively (p = 0.15).
Ipamorelin doses of 0.03-mg/kg twice daily for up to 7 days were well tolerated.
There were no significant differences between the ipamorelin and placebo groups in the key and secondary efficacy analyses.”
Myth 2: These Peptides Accelerate Tumor Growth
Both CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin indirectly increase GH and IGF-1 levels, and while some tumors have IGF receptors, the link between IGF-1 and cancer still remains unclear.
Interestingly, IGF-1 has been associated with BOTH a higher and lower risks of developing cancer risk, and the incidence of cancer itself may raise IGF-1 levels.
Given that cancer involves multiple factors that include (but are not limited to) genetics, lifestyle, and environment, the chance of a peptide causing tumor growth is low.
As evidenced in a study published in the European Journal of Endocrinology, The Growth Hormone Research Society found no connection between GHRT (growth hormone replacement therapy) and the recurrence or development of new cancers in survivors.
Nor was there any link to an increase in cancer-caused mortality:
“Growth hormone (GH) has been used for over 35 years, and its safety and efficacy has been studied extensively.
Experimental studies showing the permissive role of GH/insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-I) in carcinogenesis have raised concerns regarding the safety of GH replacement in children and adults who have received treatment for cancer and those with intracranial and pituitary tumors.
A consensus statement was produced to guide decision-making on GH replacement in children and adult survivors of cancer, in those treated for intracranial and pituitary tumors, and in patients with increased cancer risk.
With the support of the European Society of Endocrinology, the Growth Hormone Research Society convened a workshop in which 55 international key opinion leaders representing 10 professional societies were invited to participate.
This consensus statement utilized: (1) a critical review paper produced before the workshop, (2) five plenary talks, (3) evidence-based comments from four breakout groups, and (4) discussions during report-back sessions.
Current evidence reviewed from the proceedings of the workshop does not support an association between GH replacement and primary tumor or cancer recurrence.
The effect of GH replacement on secondary neoplasia risk is minor compared to host- and tumor treatment-related factors.
There is no evidence of an association between GH replacement and increased mortality from cancer among GH-deficient childhood cancer survivors.
Patients with pituitary tumor or craniopharyngioma remnants receiving GH replacement do not need to be treated or monitored differently than those not receiving GH.
GH replacement might be considered in GH-deficient adult cancer survivors in remission after careful individual risk/benefit analysis.
In children with cancer predisposition syndromes, GH treatment is generally contraindicated but may be considered cautiously in select patients.”
Myth 3: All Growth Hormone Therapies Are the Same
Although growth hormone therapies all aim to increase growth hormone production in the body, they are distinctly unique from one another.
The approach of a given therapy can either be endogenous (ex. growth hormone secretagogues to stimulate natural growth hormone production) or exogenous (ex. directly administering HGH to the body).
Growth hormone secretagogues, such as growth hormone-releasing peptides, offer only temporary effects and result in a relatively modest increase in growth hormone levels.
Whereas you would observe a far more substantial boost with direct GH administration.
In relation to the risk of developing cancer, a study published in The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism found no significant association between the dose of rhGH, mortality, and cancer incidence, making causality far less likely:
“Safety concerns have been raised regarding premature mortality, diabetes, neoplasia, and cerebrovascular disease in association with GH therapy.
Our objective is to assess the incidence of key safety outcomes.
A total of 22,311 children with growth hormone deficiency from 827 investigative sites in 30 countries underwent GH treatment.
Standardized mortality ratio (SMR) and standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was 95% CIs for mortality, diabetes, and primary cancer using general population registries.
Predominant short stature diagnoses were GH deficiency (63%), idiopathic short stature (13%), and Turner syndrome (8%), with a mean ± SD follow-up of 4.2 ± 3.2 years (∼92,000 person-years [PY]).
42 deaths occurred in patients with follow-ups, with an SMR (95% CI) of 0.61 (0.44, 0.82); the SMR was elevated for patients with cancer-related organic GH deficiency [5.87 (3.21, 9.85)].
Based on 18 cases, the type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) risk was elevated [SIR: 3.77 (2.24, 5.96)], but 72% had risk factors. In patients without cancer history, 14 primary cancers were observed [SIR: 0.71 (0.39, 1.20)].
Second neoplasms occurred in 31 of 622 cancer survivors [5.0%; 10.7 (7.5, 15.2) cases/1000 PY], and there were intracranial tumor recurrences in 67 of 823 tumor survivors [8.1%; 16.9 (13.3, 21.5) cases/1000 PY]. All three hemorrhagic stroke cases had risk factors.
In conclusion, GeNeSIS (Genetics and Neuroendocrinology of Short Stature International Study) data supports the favorable safety profile of pediatric GH treatment.
Overall risk of death or primary cancer was not elevated in GH-treated children, and no hemorrhagic strokes occurred in patients without risk factors.
T2DM incidence was elevated compared with the general population, but most cases had diabetes risk factors.”
Current Research Directions for Peptides and Cancer
At the same time, current research also suggests peptides could be a promising form of medical treatment for cancer.
For instance, in a study published in the International Journal of Molecular Sciences, researchers developed a type of gene therapy using nanoparticles with RGD peptides and P123 polymer to target gastric cancer cells.
These nanoparticles deliver a specific gene (AP-2α) and showed strong effects in reducing gastric cancer cell growth in both lab tests and in mice, while being safe for normal cells.
Therefore, peptide-based nanoparticles may be a promising therapeutic approach for gastric cancer.
In another study published in The Prostate, peptide analogs were also explored for the treatment of prostate cancer.
Currently, luteinizing hormone releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists are the standard of care for advanced androgen-dependent prostate cancer.
They are also used for patients with rising PSA levels after a surgical/radiation procedure.
But LHRH antagonists, such as Cetrorelix, are under investigation in clinical trials.
For relapsed and hormone-resistant prostate cancer, new therapies are exploring peptide analogs that target growth hormone-releasing hormone (GHRH) and bombesin to inhibit growth factors used by tumors.
Additionally, cytotoxic peptide analogs — which deliver toxic drugs like doxorubicin directly to cancer cells — have shown promise in reducing cancer growth and metastasis.
By tailoring treatments based on peptide receptor profiles in biopsy samples, peptide analogs could offer a more targeted and effective approach to the treatment of prostate cancer therapy.
The Best Source for Third Party-Tested Peptides
Despite the myths circulating online about a higher risk of cancer from using peptides like CJC-1295 and Ipamorelin, there’s no robust scientific evidence backing these claims.
More studies should be done to prove any association (or lack thereof) between these peptides and cancer/tumor growth.
But for the time being, the current body of evidence indicates these peptides are both safe and well-tolerated in healthy adults.
Therefore, there is no need to worry… especially if you are buying the pharma-grade formulations of these peptides from reputable sources like Limitless Biotech.
They have the best formulations of experimental compounds available, and no other vendor comes close to offering them at ultra-high levels of purity for reasonable prices.
Use code JAY15 to get 15% off your order of NON-VIP peptides and 5% off VIP peptides
But even if you aren’t ready to jump on the peptides bandwagon just yet…
Make sure you read the Top 10 Mistakes People Make When Starting Therapeutic Peptides FREE PDF before you place a single order!
Seriously, this short e-book will save you a lot of wasted money and poorly spent time (not to mention preventing you from potential self-inflicted missteps).
And the emails I’ll send you after downloading the book contain EXCLUSIVE 20% OFF discount codes code for all my amazing courses on using therapeutic peptides, such as:
Peptides Demystified (THE #1 course for newbies when learning to use peptides)
The Modern Woman’s Peptide Course (A course made by women for women on using therapeutic peptides)
The Ultimate GLP-1 Video Masterclass (Learn how to use GLP-1 peptides to live leaner, longer & stronger)
Raise Your Vibration To Optimize Your Love Creation!
PS — Are you looking to biohack your best life through the smart use of therapeutic peptides and other Golden Age agents?
Join me and hundreds of other male and female biohackers in The Fully Optimized Health Private Membership Group to learn how you can use peptides to optimize your health as you age.
See you on the other side!
